[deleted]
Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
191–200 of 368 posts
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the specific case of conservative politics, why does it matter that it's so skewed? I have absolutely no issue with, in this specific case, conservative politics not receiving much attention. I would liken it to not giving "flat earthers", blatant racists, and charlatans air time (excuse the hyperbole, hopefully the point was understood). While I agree that ideological conformity is a problem, I think it's a sympt…
> "flat earthers", blatant racists, and charlatans air time (excuse the hyperbole, hopefully the point was understood). The point was understood, but differently than you intended. These terms seem to be used to reference the folks that would claim to hold the conservative viewpoint, but the terms themselves only further evidence the misunderstood viewpoint non-conservatives may have of conservatives, and that misund…
To piggyback on this, one of the things Jonathan Haidt has shown in his work on ideological bias is that liberals are unable to accurately understand the conservative worldview, while both conservative and moderates are able to accurately explain liberal positions.
Here's an explanation of the study:
>One other point that I find really interesting and important about Haidt’s work is his findings on the ability of different groups to empathize across these ideological divides. So in his book (p. 287) Haidt reports on the following experiment: after determining whether someone is liberal or conservative, he then has each person answer the standard battery of questions as if he were the opposite ideology. So, he would ask a liberal to answer the questions as if he were a “typical conservative” and vice-versa. What he finds is quite striking: “The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who describe themselves as ‘very liberal.’ The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the Care and Fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives.” In other words, moderates and conservatives can understand the liberal worldview and liberals are unable to relate to the conservative worldview, especially when it comes to questions of care and fairness.
From: http://volokh.com/2014/01/17/jonathan-haidt-psychology-polit...
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#193I hate how Silicon Valley culture makes it seem like they are all for freedom of information and how the big bad government is censoring and surveilling things from a bunch of innocent hackers (startup guys) when in reality if given the opportunity this crowd does the EXACT same thing. I have limited respect for either party
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#194The issue is that FB advertises itself as "conduit" or "network connection". You log in, communicate with people and the site tools, FB runs ads on your eyeballs, etc. Similar to how I give my electricity provider money, and they give me electricity. Now FB clearly sees themselves as (let's be honest) a "power broker" or "rain maker". Not the same as "utility" or "network connection" or "conduit".
Right, and suppressing news that fits a certain criteria is a really obvious method of control — let's not forget that their algorithms suppress/highlight the people you interact with on their site.
I don't want to wander too far into conspiracy territory... but it's not completely unreasonable to suspect that a platform with such widespread and frequent use could knowingly make tiny adjustments to make a gentle push on society in one direction or another.
Also see previously: Facebook's study to see how content alters users' moods.
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#195I have no great love of conservative politics, but there's a convincing argument to be made that their ideas and views are routinely suppressed by media outside of explicitly partisan media outlets (i.e. Fox News or talk radio). There are a number of studies that back up this claim. A 2008 study[0] found that 88% of journalists donate to the Democratic party. Jonathan Haidt has shown[1] that non-economics social scie…
But what is the conservative perspective? Have you checked out the party platforms for conservatives for major states like Texas? What are the most oft-used conservative, energy-tapping, get-out-to-vote talking points? Conservatives are now the minority of this country, but due to bad districting, they have disproportionate electoral power. And you know, it's not like the GOP needed to be enemies with the scientific…
The party establishments play the Culture card, you can see Hillary Clinton playing the Culture card all the time. If you really observe, its the Rebels (Sanders and Trump) talking economics, and Establishment(Cruz/Clinton/Bush) talking about Gays, Guns and God.
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "flat earthers", blatant racists, and charlatans air time (excuse the hyperbole, hopefully the point was understood). The point was understood, but differently than you intended. These terms seem to be used to reference the folks that would claim to hold the conservative viewpoint, but the terms themselves only further evidence the misunderstood viewpoint non-conservatives may have of conservatives, and that misund…
To piggyback on this, one of the things Jonathan Haidt has shown in his work on ideological bias is that liberals are unable to accurately understand the conservative worldview, while both conservative and moderates are able to accurately explain liberal positions. Here's an explanation of the study: >One other point that I find really interesting and important about Haidt’s work is his findings on the ability of dif…
Part of that might be that conservatives and moderates hear the liberal opinion expressed in so many out outlets that it is fairly easy to give an accurate answer where liberals hear what liberal outlets think conservatives think which is sensationalized to gain eyeballs.
I was taught to be able to argue the other sides opinion as well because then you truly understand what you believe.
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are you suggesting with a straight face that CNN "News" is fair and balanced? No, it just has slightly weaker right-wing bias than Fox.
That's why they support Hillary.
I think in the US newspapers are more constrained in their biases, but as you say TV stations do take editorial views. But, as an example of regulation, only US citizens can own TV station in the US. Additionally, no single US TV station has anything like the viewer share that Facebook has.
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#198The problem is, as a private company, should Facebook choose to manipulate it's news feed algorithm to promote one candidate or the other, or for whatever reason, this would be its prerogative under the First Amendment. I personally choose to not use Facebook specifically for these reasons. Even though I know many Facebook employees personally, I don't trust it's employees to divorce their own interests and their pow…
> it's news feed algorithm to promote one candidate ... would be its prerogative under the First Amendment As long such practices are declared. People tend to look at "what's trending" in an effort to optimize/manipulate their content so that users would "trend" on it. The fact that FB was artificially eliminating stories gave false results to observers. Another way of looking at this is if Nielson were to lower the…
Nielsen makes specific claims about the meaning of its data to people who pay for that data, so it would be fraud for them to undermine those claims by manipulating the data. I doubt Facebook does anything similar.
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
But what is the conservative perspective? Have you checked out the party platforms for conservatives for major states like Texas? What are the most oft-used conservative, energy-tapping, get-out-to-vote talking points? Conservatives are now the minority of this country, but due to bad districting, they have disproportionate electoral power. And you know, it's not like the GOP needed to be enemies with the scientific…
The party establishments play the Culture card, you can see Hillary Clinton playing the Culture card all the time. If you really observe, its the Rebels (Sanders and Trump) talking economics, and Establishment(Cruz/Clinton/Bush) talking about Gays, Guns and God.
I think Clinton's main social points in terms of get-out-to-vote issues are abortion and immigration. I don't think Gays, Guns, and God are get-out-to-vote issues for Sanders, Clinton, or Trump. Those votes aren't easy to secure for these candidates.
My point is not that Democrats or the GOP have social issues as part of get-out-to-vote drives. My point is to look at the content of the GOP points, whether on scientific policy or social issues.
Re: Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the specific case of conservative politics, why does it matter that it's so skewed? I have absolutely no issue with, in this specific case, conservative politics not receiving much attention. I would liken it to not giving "flat earthers", blatant racists, and charlatans air time (excuse the hyperbole, hopefully the point was understood). While I agree that ideological conformity is a problem, I think it's a sympt…
The concern is that you may be equating the conservative position to flat earthers bases on biased information. It's the classic epistomological dilemma, how do you know what you know? Maybe reality doesn't have a liberal bias. Maybe it's just the loudest people who have a liberal bias.
I am highly unconvinced that at this point there is some piece of information that will add credibility to conservative rhetoric, economic, or social beliefs. Sure it can happen, it's just unlikely to. Positions do not gain credibility by "what-ifs".
What biased information am I acting on exactly?